On Sat, 2008-12-06 at 10:57 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > Ok. I built the source on an openSUSE 11.0 system. I used 'sudo make
> > altinstll'. It created an executable /usr/local/bin/python3.0 file.
> > Nothing was touched in /usr/bin.
>
> Ah, then you missed the fun part. Take a look at
> Ok. I built the source on an openSUSE 11.0 system. I used 'sudo make
> altinstll'. It created an executable /usr/local/bin/python3.0 file.
> Nothing was touched in /usr/bin.
Ah, then you missed the fun part. Take a look at the install: target
in the Makefile.
> I need to start writing some c
On Sat, 2008-12-06 at 01:27 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > For *NIX machines, will 'python' be placed into /usr/bin?
>
> Not by default, no. Just try it and see for yourself.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
Ok. I built the source on an openSUSE 11.0 system. I used 'sudo make
altinstll'. It created
> For *NIX machines, will 'python' be placed into /usr/bin?
Not by default, no. Just try it and see for yourself.
Regards,
Martin
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Terry Reedy wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>> Since the source code is incompatible, I was expecting the Python
>>> executable to have a new name such as 'python3'
>>
>> It does: the executable is called python3.0.
>
> Why do you say that?
Because it is - on Unix. I assumed that was the platfo
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 02:10 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > Since the source code is incompatible, I was expecting the Python
> > executable to have a new name such as 'python3'
>
> It does: the executable is called python3.0.
>
> > or for the default
> > source code filename to change to '.p
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Since the source code is incompatible, I was expecting the Python
executable to have a new name such as 'python3'
It does: the executable is called python3.0.
Why do you say that? As I reported on the py3 list when requesting a
new name -- in particular, python3, the
> Since the source code is incompatible, I was expecting the Python
> executable to have a new name such as 'python3'
It does: the executable is called python3.0.
> or for the default
> source code filename to change to '.py3' or something.
Such a proposal would be rejected. In a few years from
The migration strategy detailed in PEP 3000 using 2to3 is quite nice.
However, I am looking for suggestions for migrating to 3 while I still
have code that requires 2.
Since the source code is incompatible, I was expecting the Python
executable to have a new name such as 'python3' or for the defau
